> You missed my point, which was precisely that technical> controls against duplication are inevitably worthless, and> that, therefore, copying is inevitable. I meant to imply> that adding arbitrary legal restrictions (versus CDs and> DVDs) are not sensible in this medium ("eBooks"). You're> allowed to resell CDs and DVDs, i.e., you're allowed to> transfer the right to view.>Hi Jonathan,

I believe what you're talking about is called the "first sale doctrine," which says that once a work has been distributed with the consent of the copyright owner, the person who receives it is free to redistribute the work without obtaining the consent of the copyright holder. There is a restriction to that in the 1976 Copyright Act that prohibits lending or renting phonographs or audio CDs for commercial advantage, unless you're a non-profit such as a library or you get permission from the copyright holder. But otherwise that's the law.

Shrink-wrap license agreements were created for software to get around the first sale doctrine. Basically these say that by opening the shrinkwrap you agree to the license, which says that the work is being licensed under stated terms rather than "sold." Our click through license is the same idea. Basically you can't download the eBook unless you say with a mouse click that you agree to the terms, which is why the first sale doctrine does not apply. Again I think an eBook is more like software than a physical book in this matter.

So I think our approach is legally sound. The question is whether it is best for the authors, the readers, and Artima, and as I mentioned before we are going to review this with legal and other advisers.

Having now spent some time reviewing the eBook licenses of other providers, I have to say that I regret my "contributions" to this forum. They're out of place here, as the Artima license is completely consistent with all the others (as Bill Venners has rightly pointed out). I'll take up my problems with non-transferrable licenses elsewhere.